DiabloFans

Quote from "Kenzai" »

So do we actually all agree now that the style of the previous games were different in some ways while this isnt necessarily bad but is the reason why some who loved it more are mad?

I agree that Diablo 2 aimed for highly-detailed photo-realism (which a 2D game can afford), and Diablo 3 aims for stylization (assuring a timeless quality). But they share the same spirit despite the difference in style.

Do you understand that Sacred 2, Fallout 3 and NWN are not isometric games?

It would be like saying how D3 should not be isometric because Quake 3 isn't. Fallout 3 was migrated from a 2D environment into a 3D one because there was no arcade factor to the gameplay style. Diablo is an arcade game. No one wants to see it migrated to anything else but another isometric hack and slash.

I think you are also forgetting that Fallout 3 doesn't have randomly-generated dungeons, are you? There's a matter of randomly piecing together detailed assets, and the fact that they can be viewed from one angle only is the only reason why Blizzard will succeed implementing random worlds in a 3D game, which will be the first time ever that anyone does something like that.

When you focus on graphics, you are making something that will last as long as the current best technology lasts. When you focus on other qualities and pull that off, you are making something that is timeless.

That is what separates Blizzard from other companies and makes their games special. Do you think ten million people play WoW and pay every month because of the crappy graphics? Why aren't they playing something else, instead of sticking to a 7-year old game that looked kind of crappy even when it was new?

You care about graphics in a game that you will play for a few months then turn your back to it. Blizzard fans look for substance and something that lasts.

Quote from "Atrumentis" »

No, thats not the definition. The definition depends on your culture, and culture depends on the latest trend (which is what culture is). The word 'warlock' comes from the old english term 'waer logger', meaning 'covenant breaker' or 'traitor', which is why they are generally considered evil. Nowadays though, thanks to the media (like games), people now define it as just a male witch. But call a real male witch a warlock and he will likely be highly offended at being called a traitor. As I said, it depends on the latest trend and culture. The definition of every word is based on some sort of latest trend.

It does refer to only male witches being the traitors though, so yes I was wrong about there being female warlocks, but "warlock = male witch" is certainly not the only definitive term (and its certainly not a definition that isn't based on culture).

Zeitgeist is the word you're looking for.

Excuse me Ollo, but are you refering to Diablo or Diablo 2? As far as I can tell, Diablo didn't have skill tree's either. Also Diablo 2 didn't have Diablo classes either. Also D3 has light radius but I guess you were too overwhelmed with awesomeness of the gameplay trailer to notice it, so it's forgiven. Creepiness seems to be more present than in D2, more like D1 to me. That leaves us with 'pseudorealism' and 'inventory' but guess what. D3 was supposed to be a sequel and not a remake. I'm sure we would all be happy if Blizzard just re-released D2 with a different name but yeah..... That kind of 'pseudorealism' doesn't work in a 3D engine.

Let me preface this by saying that I firmly believe that playing solo or co-op should be a choice one makes. This thread exists because I firmly believe that the current implementation forces us to play co-op any time it's available. Why do I believe this?

First, monster HPs only scale up 50% per person. This means that four people who can farm T1 solo can very easily do T2 in a group and probably can do T3 without too much difficulty. Alone, this is a massive slant in favor of co-op. You can, literally, farm above your gear, if you're in a group. Couple this with the fact that each difficulty bump up increases the XP bonus you receive as well as gold find and magic find and there is no point to ever playing solo if you can put another person in your game.

Secondly, on top of that each person in the group gives a further 25% XP and MF bonus through the Strength in Numbers buff. So, in addition to being able to bump your difficulty up because of HP scaling, you're gaining more XP and more MF.

Thirdly, co-op groups can share drops among themselves. Solo players cannot ever do this. Although I don't think this should change, I think it's the most "fair" way to make co-op attractive. I don't think having a huge advantage in XP/hr and items/hr is the right way to do it.

How would I fix this so that playing solo wasn't so obviously inferior to co-op?

Strength in Numbers removed entirely.

Monster HP scaling changed to 75% for each additional player, up from 50%.

Leave the "bind-to-game" alone as the major incentive to play co-op.

This would mean that co-op groups would still have an advantage over the solo adventurer, through the more-lenient per-player HP scaling, but it wouldn't be anywhere near as drastic as it is right now. The ultimate goal should be to create some degree of parity between solo play and co-op play and I feel that the current implementation is skewed way too much in favor of co-op play. If you're not playing co-op right now, you are doing it wrong, and that's not how it should be.

Quote from "Equinox" »

Yeah, in other words:

"I don't care about anyone really so let's remove LAN despite how easy it is to put it in."
We all know most people play on battle.net. Fine. But some of us don't. Give us LAN, please.
By your logic, Blizzard should never do games like DIII. WoW's lot more popular... most people play WoW... most people play on Bnet... so let's just make WoW.

you fail miserably understanding my logic because you're blindly supporting yours.

What i'm saying is that:

1) whoever is whining about it has no reason to, because he has internet. The people that want to play LAN because they cant afford/get access to a connection cant say a thing.

After making that clear, we should start questioning the reason they keep asking for LAN.
It was the only way to pirate the game yet still be able to play multiplayer. If you care about Singleplayer only you dont need LAN anyway.

2) When you play LAN one of the computers connected acts as a server. That alone gives enough information to experienced hackers about the data flow of the game to the official servers, making the way easier to hacking them.

Weird how no private server in WoW works right, eh? And its 4 years old already.

That last comment about my logic and how Blizzard shouldnt make games like Diablo is completely crap and without sense at all. From my comment you understood that? You're either stupid or too drunk to understand what i'm saying.

I was always for a free multiplayer part, but i dont want the exact same thing as i had in Diablo 2. I want more. That doesnt mean i want to pay monthly for it, I just want at least the security i had (and still have) in WoW. And the possibility to save myself from spammers or any kind of idiots who spoil the game (through bots, hacks and anything else that isnt supposed to be in the game behavior wise).

Quote from "Equinox" »

Bottom line: Removal of LAN => Less sales. That's all it would do.

that you understood from talking to a few kids in a forum and from your limitless marketing experience, no doubt.

Its very obvious there isnt anything that points in that direction.

You know how battle.net was kept alive that long? Because it had people on it. And mostly because of Starcraft and Warcraft 3 (regular too but mostly DotA). The more people on the servers the more income they can have from advertising (the little banner on top, yeah), thus keeping the service free without having problems with the server maintenance.

Now, if LAN helps people abuse any security holes on the system and hack/cheat on closed realms, that would definitely shoo people from playing. Remember how during the time of serious duping the game was unplayable?
Probably not, as i remember you didnt play or like Diablo 2.


anyway, the thing is that the ones that would pirate the game, will do it again anyway. Keeping LAN off will make it impossible for them to play the game with others but it will also help keep the secutiry of the closed realms intact.

Man, I'm betting that the Moderators on this thread are like banging their heads on their keyboards when they see some of you guys (I don't even have to name them cause they know who they are) come and post the 10 best "quotes" and 6-8 out of 10 are your own questions. I mean posting 1 would be acceptable and clearly understandable. This thread is definately the epitome of vanity. Guys, if you repost your own question then what's the point of voting when your voting for yourself....The Mods get it that you want YOUR OWN question to be asked, if you didn't then why would you have posted the qustions initially? If your questions were truly pertinent then others would have chosen it without having to "push for it" yourself. Sad

Props to all of you who were humble enough to encourage others before yourself and really showing that you do support the D3 community instead of acting selfishly.


Sorry about the off topic post, but man, it's almost depressing when you really see how people are. I really had to express my disapointment in some folks out here for their lack of maturity on this thread. Hopefully the mods can understand the situation and not delete this message as off topic spam. If they do then I hope they have the decency to talk about the problem themselves instead of ignoring it.